platform agnosticism: in defense of PC gaming

I picked up the May issue of Computer Games magazine last week. I switched to this publication after dumping PC Gamer last year. Having been through five issues the content feels more refined, and there was a hell of a reduction in ads - but there's something missing. It's still focused on previews and reviews. I love Tom Chick's column, and the in-depth study of games and game culture that usually takes place in the last few pages of the magazine. But why aren't these cover stories instead of the trumpeting of typical exclusives? These exploratory articles are reserved for the back, which in most game magazines is where the cheat codes or letters pages go. Is it so unfashionable to take gaming seriously? Computer Games' recent turn to fumbling, awkward attempts at humour seems to point in this direction.

Computer Games have also changed their format in the last couple of issues. The addition of the "Online" section last month was created to address the growing community of online-only gamers trying to juggle multiple subscriptions. In May's issue I flipped through this section and came across something entirely shocking: console game reviews. In a computer gaming magazine! What in the fuck was going on here?

As if to usher in this change was Tom Chick's interesting article that paints himself as a "platform agnostic", or someone who cares little about which platform a game is on, just that he gets to play it. In today's marketplace with so many games competing for your attention, this seemed like a pretty good philosophy at first. There's really no point in arguing over which platform is better, because that's time that could be spent gaming.

Then I thought about it some more. Platform agnosticism...what was he really saying? Was he making excuses for the new section of console previews and reviews that seems so out of place? I always thought Mr. Chick was an ardent supporter of PC gaming, and even though the end of his piece contained a nod to the PC crowd, by claiming that no one platform holds sway over his gaming selections I felt he was dismissing the relevance of PC gaming altogether.

Over the past few years, the number of multi-platform releases has increased dramatically. So much so, that they've been making the top of PC game award lists. And if they're great games, they deserve it. However I remember a time when "console port" was a dirty word - a curse equivalent to something you reserve for your most hated enemies. The philosophy of platform agnosticism marks a new era of complacency on the part of the PC gamer. I'm not about to settle for games that weren't developed exclusively for the PC.

In an increasingly console-dominated marketplace, developers are almost scared to go PC-only. Hardware requirements and compatibility issues are a nightmare, as much as DirectX tries to abate them. The myth that piracy is more rampant on PCs should also have been dispelled by now - piracy on consoles should be as much of a concern. Or at least that's what Macrovision would have us believe.

The console wars are all about branding. As hardware specs move towards a universal platform of sorts, marketers want to continue to sell their brand, otherwise we would see the advent of this platform a lot sooner. A gamer's utopian fantasy at best. Maintaining this separation is good business if you consider the gaming mob. Having a bunch of rabid fans acting as free advertisers for these brands is a pretty good deal for console makers and game publishers alike. The industry (theoretically) tries hard to keep that mindshare with bigger and better products, or building on beloved game properties. By being platform agnostic you're ignoring this mindset (not necessarily a bad thing), but also that games aren't necessarily developed for the platform it would look and play best on. It's all about the money invested in the platform. How many people do you think would have played Grand Theft Auto III if it was released only on the PC? Probably quite a lot. But it wouldn't have come close to the millions of copies sold for the PS2, or the sales of new systems as a result of the game.

As many have already pointed out, this next generation of consoles needs to be more than another graphical upgrade. Technology is quickly reaching a plateau, or at least approaching PC level of quality. Remember the mainstream journalists waxing poetic about the online capability of the XBox and PS2 as if it was the new frontier? They seem to have forgotten about the PC that was doing it ten years ago. As consoles and PCs bridge the gap separating the two audiences, perhaps platform agnosticism won't even be necessary. But that would short-circuit this discussion.

As I understand it, by being platform agnostic you go where the games go. However, I honestly believe certain games should only be played on PC: traditional CRPGs, FPS, RTS, and tactical shooters to name a few. By being platform agnostic you're basically giving in to the console machine, because that's where the money is. The world of consoles is a magical land where developers are paid to make games for a five year old piece of hardware and still charge full price, and where traditionally complex game mechanics are broken down for simpler controls and a wider audience. A multi-platform release is not the same as if it had been designed for the PC. A platform agnostic would treat multi-platform releases as equals, because the assumption is the game should be the same even if it isn't true.

Rainbow Six gave birth to what we know as a squad tactical shooter. I have many fond memories of that game. Rogue Spear built upon that model and became what is called by some as the last great squad tactical shooter. That is, until they play SWAT 4. Then UbiSoft gives us Lockdown, which is clearly a bastardization of the franchise and has no place on my hard drive. This probably won't be a problem, though, as the eventual release of a PC version has been called into question. As another example, Ghost Recon was designed for and released on the PC in 2001, and was released a year later on XBox and PS2. I considered it a decent game, though missing the pure tactics involved in Rainbow Six. Its sequel was designed for consoles, with the PC version cancelled last month. Thief III and Deus Ex were concurrently developed for the PC with mixed results. Both series started on the PC, and had gameplay modified to suit both platforms for their sequels. A platform agnostic wouldn't care about these things - the game is still being released. But for the fans of the source material as it were, these are inherently different games emblazoned with a name that gives them an undeserved reputation.

I think platform agnosticism is a cop out reflective of the current state of the industry. Sure, there are a lot of cool things happening with consoles right now. The release of the next generation hardware has a much larger fan base getting riled up, collected after the release of the Playstation 2. A lot of big name titles are at the gates ready to be shown at E3, hoping to stretch the life of this generation's hardware one more year. It's a lot easier to get excited about this stuff than what Windows Longhorn means for gaming or the coming wave of true 64-bit processors.

Being truly platform agnostic is like giving up on the PC. Though I'm not going to kid myself. The PC as a platform hasn't exactly been a hotbed of activity in recent years save for the last four months or so of 2004. And I'm talking about exclusive PC products, not ports or multi-platform releases. Even though PC gaming in 2005 has been great so far, I can already count two of these releases as multi-platform (Brothers in Arms and Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory).

This is a pretty defensive reaction to what could probably be considered an off-handed sentiment of Computer Games' back page columnist. The simple truth is that I consider the PC as my home. It troubles me to see development steered towards consoles with former PC exclusives. As developers close, new ideas become an endangered species and the influx of sequels and ports continue. But don't think that this is the end. I refuse to let it be. I'll always be a PC gamer. Just one that happens to own a couple of consoles.

in a world of magnets and miracles